New drone has no pilot anywhere, so who's accountable? (Skynet now a reality)

The Navy is testing an autonomous plane that will land on an aircraft carrier. The prospect of heavily armed aircraft screaming through the skies without direct human control is unnerving to many.

The X-47B marks a paradigm shift in warfare, one that is likely to have far-reaching consequences. With the drone's ability to be flown autonomously by onboard computers, it could usher in an era when death and destruction can be dealt by machines operating semi-independently.

"Lethal actions should have a clear chain of accountability," said Noel Sharkey, a computer scientist and robotics expert. "This is difficult with a robot weapon. The robot cannot be held accountable. So is it the commander who used it? The politician who authorized it? The military's acquisition process? The manufacturer, for faulty equipment?"

The X-47B will not only land itself, but will also know what kind of weapons it is carrying, when and where it needs to refuel with an aerial tanker, and whether there's a nearby threat, said Carl Johnson, Northrop's X-47B program manager. "It will do its own math and decide what it should do next."

7. So true

we should base our priorities on maslow's hierarchy of needs with the bottom 2 levels being provided for - for free to all citizens - by very high taxes on the rich, legalizing and heavily taxing recreational drugs, and ending the MIC as we know it. if only those in power gave a shit about us.. sigh...

6. This question has been around since computers went commercial

Who's responsible for the action the code directs? With virtually any piece of software you buy, you take responsibility for the actions of the software when you sign most terms of agreement. At the end of the day, the person using the device will be "held responsible" for the actions of the drone. However, societies have given wide latitude to "collateral damage" in war. I don't suspect these drones will be treated any differently.

29. I doubt if it would harm the carrier

This kind of miscalculation can (and does) happen with human pilots, and the pilot is usually the only casualty. Carriers are built to withstand this sort of mishap. Nothing a little grey paint can't fix.

If it's going to miscalculate, it might be a big one. Like not recognizing the carrier as "friendly", and launching it's missiles and bombs at it. That could get nasty.

31. Automatic landing systems have been around for a long time - proven technology.

The Automatic Carrier Landing System (ACLS) is similar to the ICLS, in that it displays "needles" that indicate aircraft position in relation to glideslope and final bearing. An approach utilizing this system is said to be a "Mode II" approach. Additionally, some aircraft are capable of "coupling" their autopilots to the glideslope/azimuth signals received via data link from the ship, allowing for a "hands-off" approach.

11. It's still in the "Demonstration Project" stage.

I remember when the Navy was fiddling with what we now call drones, way back in the late seventies, out in Bainbridge, and the USAF was openly derisive. Not just slightly snarky--they were downright rude assholes. The pilots were the biggest jerks. I find it amusing now, frankly, since they jumped so hard on the drone bandwagon and tried to push everyone else off.

I remember seeing something a few years earlier called, back then, the Bell Model 222, on a drawing board, that later, much later, with a lot of tweaking and changes, became the (still not very beloved) Osprey.

Anyway, that was a LONG time ago, when all this stuff was coming off the drawing board. There's many a slip twixt the cup and the lip. There will be adjustments.

The bottom line is this--I don't think we're the only ones thinking along these lines--it's hubris to think we are.

14. Just wait till a terrorist organization or a 12-year old middle school student.....

take control of one of these and attack the homeland. This is ridiculous. I'm not opposed to a drone that can monitor and take action on things such as needing refueling but the actual act of refueling should be done under human direction. I can see a day when the refueling tanker needs to head back to base and the drone wants its fuel and it blows the tanker out of the air because the tanker won't stay to refuel.

23. This is breath takingly arrogant and also stupid.

back in the eighties, I was a graveyard shift receptionist for a deluxe elder care condo organization.

The management had installed top of the line "security" for each of the housing units. I spent 40 % of my time tracing back erroneous signals, falsely put out by blips in the programming and the circuitry.

God or Goddess help us if the drones' computers operate as poorly as those things did.

25. This has got to be the worst idea, ever.

They've created a being weaponized to kill humans, essentially, a predator far more dangerous than any of the biological predators we've killed off in the biosphere for our own safety, and perhaps more intelligent. It has no interest in seeing human beings survive, nor morality about killing to restrain it.

The worldwide arms race now is going to push artificial intelligence further. This thing will evolve through human intermediaries more quickly than anything biological does.

The best thing that could happen is that this goes on a rampage and kills a bunch of our own people. The worst thing that could happen is in twenty or thirty years a bunch of more advanced drones can go on a rampage and kill about a billion people: Terminator Holocaust.

I'm hoping the current military cuts will kill off this thing. Our military, like our whole country, has lost its collective mind.

27. All of the psychopaths giggling behind the scenes and proud of themselve are accountable.

28. I'm not sayiing I agree,,,

But when push comes to shove, Hasn't it been stupid ass humans that have created torture, war, and problems. It is our human nature, and isn't this human nature in a robotic way????, I don't see how it will ever end!